PVB Points Chart !

[tjkraz]

Poly for a new member is a waste, especially when I would think most members want 1 bedrooms, despite what DVC says

Personally *I* bought DVC for the larger villas, and that's the way DVC was marketed for many years.

But Disney has 25,000 rooms on property and the vast majority of them are traditional hotel rooms. A spacious room that sleeps 5 with a kitchenette and essentially two bathrooms is perfectly adequate for many vacationers.

If I'm a long-time Polynesian resort fan, DVC Deluxe Studios are just a new label on the room I've been paying hundreds per night for many years. If I'm a frequent guest of Value or Moderate resorts, DVC Studios represent an economical way to upgrade to Deluxe.

Even at $160 per point, buyers will break even after 10 years or so...just a fraction of the ownership period. (Obviously there are better values resale but it's very easy to see how people justify paying direct prices.)

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Poly and GF Villas are pure money grabs after the mess that was the Aulani rollout. GF sells but is too small, not as small as VGC but small.

Now, DVC is asking members old and new to pay a premium for an 11 month booking window for studios only...

I'm thrilled I bought my major contract at BWV in 200 for $62 a point and got access to an 11 month window to book Studios, 1BRs, 2BRs and GVs...

Poly for a new member is a waste, especially when I would think most members want 1 bedrooms, despite what DVC says

I agree with everything except one bedrooms.

Those are often left over... Your paying way more for what you get in a studio or a 2 bedroom, respectively.

But other than that you hit it on the head.

The flexibility model doesn't work/has been intentionally eliminated anymore... And once the point costs started escalating... You started to get ripped off.

I haven't looked...but I'm sure right now there are threads with longstanding disneyphiles/DVC members talking about how their "guides" are fedexing them the paperwork for their new poly contracts!!!!

But they reality is they are buying smoke... A resale at Saratoga for half the price will yield more use/value...if you're a pragmatist.

 

[WMorganS]

Personally I'm inclined to give DVC the benefit of the doubt on Bungalow point rates. DVC has full access to occupancy data for comparably-priced Grand Villas at resorts like VGF and BLT. They know the rate at which those rooms fill-up and the average number of guests staying in those rooms. Personally I doubt that people are booking Grand Villas solely because they need to house more than 8 people. Heck, you could get 2 Two Bedroom villas for fewer points and have better accommodations (four bedrooms, 4-6 bathrooms, two living rooms, two kitchens, two washer/dryers, etc.) I don't really understand what motivates people to spend so many points on existing Grand Villas so it wouldn't be fair for me to comment on the Bungalows. Both are way outside of my tax bracket. Worst case, a reallocation that raised each Studio 1 pt per night would allow them to make a dent in the bungalow rates. And the Studios would still be reasonable, IMO (I was expecting rates higher than VGF in the first place.) That's definitely something I'd take into account if buying Poly points--include some buffer to guard against a future increase in Studio costs.

We've never rented a grand villa before and I can't speak for everyone, but we're planning to go with 3 other families, totaling 19, with 11 kids in the 10-14 age range. 4 2BR's would be cheaper but absolutely no comparison to 2 GV's. If the trip actually happens (i.e. all 4 families decides they can do it), it could well be the trip of a lifetime for all of us... and well worth banking and borrowing to make it happen.

Also, the more I think about PVB, the happier I am with it overall. The bungalow are crazy expensive, but they fill a niche that DVC wasn't really addressing. E.g. family of 3 buys enough points to stay in a 1BR or studio at least once per year, 5 years later they have 2 kids and enough points to stay in 1BR at least once per year, but 10-20 years later they have a lot more disposable income and more points than they need. Disney has to offer them something amazing or that big pile of disposable will go elsewhere.

Disney is in it for the long haul. DVC may not go "moderate" in their message, but they definitely want to grab families in their late 20's because those families will have deep pockets down the line.

 

[SpaceMountain77]

Caribbean is their highest annual occupancy hotel...has been since October 1988.

If they were to convert... That would be a tough choice.

First, it's prime to lease to holiday inn or an outside operator. Disney hotels make no money. They are killed by overhead. They are they To fill the parks, downtown Disney, and their own giftshops.

That's what Disney wants. The operation is - I believe - destined for outsourcing.

Flamingo crossing...was a step in that plan. Draw in big chains such as Marriott to familiarize them with on property operations and doctrine... Then cut them a "deal" to run "Disney resorts"

So making Caribbean a "DVC" would eliminate a future good bargaining chip.

Second, DVC are all longtime Disney watchers, travelers...I think the research would Indicate that a "deluxe" conversion of cbr wouldn't sell...as in they won't be able to pump it based on history.

Which means it would have to be lower point cost, rental structure...which would bring me back to square one.

This is an intriguing post, one with thoughts that I had not heard expressed before.

Are all resorts under consideration for leasing or a particular subset?

 

[tfc3rid]

This is an intriguing post, one with thoughts that I had not heard expressed before.

Are all resorts under consideration for leasing or a particular subset?

I would figure the lower occupancy % for the deluxes make them attractive for more conversion...

The core of the problem is TDO is charging prices for the Waldorf Astoria when their deluxes aren't close to that...

 

[supersnoop]

First, it's prime to lease to holiday inn or an outside operator. Disney hotels make no money. They are killed by overhead. They are they To fill the parks, downtown Disney, and their own giftshops.

That's what Disney wants. The operation is - I believe - destined for outsourcing.

Flamingo crossing...was a step in that plan. Draw in big chains such as Marriott to familiarize them with on property operations and doctrine... Then cut them a "deal" to run "Disney resorts"

So making Caribbean a "DVC" would eliminate a future good bargaining chip.

If your supposition is correct, your argument doesn't hold merit.

If Disney wants to get out from the expense of operating the hotel, DVC would be ideal. Leasing out to a hotel operator would bring in small lease payments likely tied to occupancy or revenue. Converting to DVC would bring in larges sums of money up front and pass all operating costs onto the members.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

If your supposition is correct, your argument doesn't hold merit.

If Disney wants to get out from the expense of operating the hotel, DVC would be ideal. Leasing out to a hotel operator would bring in small lease payments likely tied to occupancy or revenue. Converting to DVC would bring in larges sums of money up front and pass all operating costs onto the members.

You missed the part where you have to convert existing "cheaper" hotels in their current location and sell/rent them at a premium level...I don't see that as viable

My assumptions on the theory are:
1. They have no Interest in a creating a "value" or tiered system as they did at rack
2. It would cost a much larger investment to "renovate" a site like that...throwing the sales formula off
3. That Disney will continue to shed overhead in a effort to reduce liabilities...even of it costs a little profit in third party leasing
See downtown Disney

Now...those are theories and assumptions...so treat as such...but I can make a compelling case.

Eisner was the "net caster" in parks... As much as he went crazy...he liked the parks (different era) and he did things that are inclusive to bring people in.

Iger...very good at Hollywood but very different at parks - specifically wdw. It's not been a policy of "inclusion"...it's been exclusion... Or "luxury" as they would sell it.
They want guarantees of money's and limits of liabilities...which is what large companies spend all their time working towards.

I think this "I can see a moderate in DVC" stuff is just wishful thinking...building out the "exclusive" market internally and dumping operations on the cash business is how a suit would play it.

Just a theory to kick around like pele.

 

[skier_pete]

Poly and GF Villas are pure money grabs after the mess that was the Aulani rollout. GF sells but is too small, not as small as VGC but small.

Now, DVC is asking members old and new to pay a premium for an 11 month booking window for studios only...

I'm thrilled I bought my major contract at BWV in 200 for $62 a point and got access to an 11 month window to book Studios, 1BRs, 2BRs and GVs...

Poly for a new member is a waste, especially when I would think most members want 1 bedrooms, despite what DVC says

As lockedoutlogic said - the data proves that last statement wrong. 1 bedrooms are always the last to book. Popularity seems to be in the following order, studios, Grand villas, 2-bedrooms then finally 1-bedrooms.

For that reason, you can see Disney's thinking with PVB:
1) Convert rooms in an undersold hotel to higher occupancy, up front money DVC.
2) Create additional super-deluxe accomodations for those that like living large.
3) If buyers here want a 1-bedroom or 2-bedroom, they've got plenty of other places to get those.

I am not at all critical of what Disney did with PVB. The bungalows aren't designed for me - I wouldn't be staying there at 1/2 the price. We bought with the intention of staying in studios, so a higher concentration of studios in the DVC family also benefits me greatly. Many PVB buyer's will discover they like 1-bedrooms (or 2-bedrooms) better, and it will open up opportunity to stay here.

If you think about it this way: the % of DVC owners wanting to stay in studios is probably going to remain about the same, which the % of studios available just went up by several %, this benefits anyone wanting a studio across the entire property.

So even if getting into the Poly is hard for a while (which is likely), it will make getting in other places easier.

 

[jerseyduke]

I agree with everything except one bedrooms.

Those are often left over... Your paying way more for what you get in a studio or a 2 bedroom, respectively.

But other than that you hit it on the head.

The flexibility model doesn't work/has been intentionally eliminated anymore... And once the point costs started escalating... You started to get ripped off.

I haven't looked...but I'm sure right now there are threads with longstanding disneyphiles/DVC members talking about how their "guides" are fedexing them the paperwork for their new poly contracts!!!!

But they reality is they are buying smoke... A resale at Saratoga for half the price will yield more use/value...if you're a pragmatist.

True.

But i still say the all studio design was (mostly) dictated by the fact that the poly was done in existing structures, and for time reasons.

If they had rebuilt we would be at least a year away from opening, and a major conversion, probably at least 6 months. That could have potentially left DVC with nothing to sell, as VGF would most likely sell out before either of those could have been completed.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Well lets not forget that the "original" leaked plans... Which looked pretty to close to authentic as other things that have come to pass out of Iger's office...I mean..."a rogue custodian without knowledge or access"..include what appeared to be a 7-10 story tower near the TTC.

Now...what if they did the "low risk, high sale" bungalows and studios - guaranteed to be booked most of the time - first, and a tower would be a phase II?
And in said phase two are your 2s, 1s, grand villa, studio combos?

Makes alot of sense, huh?

And before you say "a tower doesn't fit poly!!!"

Remember: the poly was envisioned/ drawn up by "walts men" in the 60's as a tower. it became "long houses" under the deal where US Steel was going to build and operate the contempt and the poly. Outsourcing at wdw long pre dates "in sourcing"

But roy didnt like the arrangement (a la Eisner with tischman at the swan and the dolphin in the 90s...another outsourcing experiment)... So they took them over.

Even in the 60's the Disney people saw the value of "the view" of the precious as a selling point. Their vision was to have a tower poly and the tower contemp with a view...along with a Venetian, Thai, Persian and other 7 seasons hotels...
And they all were concept drawn as? You guessed it: towers with a view.

My point is that I am 100% convicted that this is phase I...just as I think the grand was phase one... And retroactively beach club and Wilderness lodge where "phase I"s


Come to think of it - why am I getting flak for saying that Disney wants to outsource the hotels? They tried to do it when there were real gators still in fantasyland...not Peter Pan.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

True.

But i still say the all studio design was (mostly) dictated by the fact that the poly was done in existing structures, and for time reasons.

If they had rebuilt we would be at least a year away from opening, and a major conversion, probably at least 6 months. That could have potentially left DVC with nothing to sell, as VGF would most likely sell out before either of those could have been completed.

No argument...

The studio conversion was quick and easy for the poly...and allows them a quick, fairly cheap
Jump into sales...
Those floating paradises werent even started this time
Last year and now their gonna start to make bank in a few weeks.

That and of course that construction of a finally "nice pool" at the poly....45 years in the making


Want some trivia?

John Lennon signed the legal document officially dissolving the Beatles at a table next to the poly pool...
True story.

And tricky Dick Nixon delivered his most famous line "I am not a crook" from the hallway on the third floor of the contemporary...
True story

 

[beer dave]

As lockedoutlogic said - the data proves that last statement wrong. 1 bedrooms are always the last to book. Popularity seems to be in the following order, studios, Grand villas, 2-bedrooms then finally 1-bedrooms.

For that reason, you can see Disney's thinking with PVB:
1) Convert rooms in an undersold hotel to higher occupancy, up front money DVC.
2) Create additional super-deluxe accomodations for those that like living large.
3) If buyers here want a 1-bedroom or 2-bedroom, they've got plenty of other places to get those.

I am not at all critical of what Disney did with PVB. The bungalows aren't designed for me - I wouldn't be staying there at 1/2 the price. We bought with the intention of staying in studios, so a higher concentration of studios in the DVC family also benefits me greatly. Many PVB buyer's will discover they like 1-bedrooms (or 2-bedrooms) better, and it will open up opportunity to stay here.

If you think about it this way: the % of DVC owners wanting to stay in studios is probably going to remain about the same, which the % of studios available just went up by several %, this benefits anyone wanting a studio across the entire property.

So even if getting into the Poly is hard for a while (which is likely), it will make getting in other places easier.

This is where we disagree-- the people buying the poly, as they were with GF, will mostly buy enough for a studio at the poly for whatever their yearly trip requirements are. The poly as 360 studios, but enough points for 480 studios. Unless the 1 m points allotted to the bungalows are actually used for bungalows (highly unlikely) the demand for studios will increase and availability will drop. The caveat to this would be if some of the new poly owners would upgrade to a 1 bedroom at one of the cheaper resorts since the poly studio requires more points. The alternative is "hey we can't get in at the poly, but if we get a studio at BWV we cam stay for 9 nights instead of 7.. or we could go in a more point pricier time of year.. which I think is more likely.

 

[Judique]

Want some trivia?

John Lennon signed the legal document officially dissolving the Beatles at a table next to the poly pool...
True story.

And tricky Dick Nixon delivered his most famous line "I am not a crook" from the hallway on the third floor of the contemporary...
True story

Thanks for the trivia.

Can you explain where your reference 'precious' comes from? Are you referring to the Castle or to the Magic Kingdom in general?

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Thanks for the trivia.

Can you explain where your reference 'precious' comes from? Are you referring to the Castle or to the Magic Kingdom in general?

I saw that the other day and I loved it.

The "precious" refers to the castle in reference to gollum in lord of the rings.

Hey...I think it's awesome... I've had I don't know how many picture taken... Let alone the kids... In front of that thing...

I get it. Particularly if you don't frequent the place, you're shelling out alot, it's special to get the view.

But "precious" reminds me of the threads about bay lake... And now I'm sure extends to GF and will poly.

I remember supposedly "grown adults" typing things like "I need my 2 bedroom mk view!!!"

Woah... Simmer down...

These are recurring/frequent travelers...
As many a famous football coach has said:
"Act like you've been there before"

 

[lockedoutlogic]

This is where we disagree-- the people buying the poly, as they were with GF, will mostly buy enough for a studio at the poly for whatever their yearly trip requirements are. The poly as 360 studios, but enough points for 480 studios. Unless the 1 m points allotted to the bungalows are actually used for bungalows (highly unlikely) the demand for studios will increase and availability will drop. The caveat to this would be if some of the new poly owners would upgrade to a 1 bedroom at one of the cheaper resorts since the poly studio requires more points. The alternative is "hey we can't get in at the poly, but if we get a studio at BWV we cam stay for 9 nights instead of 7.. or we could go in a more point pricier time of year.. which I think is more likely.

I'm gonna have to with Dave this time, Pete (finally! )...

I see alot of references to people buying "x type of room for a week or x many days"

That is not the Disney sale model and not how they market and sell. That's how the old style timeshare goes that they have gone great lengths to try and distinguish themselves from.

The poly will be bought in 175-400 point blocks predominantly as all the others have sold.

Will there be people buying 1000, 1500, and up? Quite possibly - but that won't be for "a bungalow the week of thanksgiving"

First... Disney won't sell that way because they can't back up availability. There was a rumor they did that at GF but I never saw any confirmation of it. They can't - nor would they want to. Disney wants you to "fill the holes" in the calendar...not create them. That would be bad business.

So the point?

As Dave said...people will throw 25-50K average at the poly development...then they will do what those of us that spent 10-25K years ago do:
They will jump around and try to maximize their stays and time in Orlando ( other things... But DVC is best used at wdw and that will never change...you know - the giftshops?). And the points will put some stress in areas less stressed before...maybe bay lake gets poly overflow...or wilderness lodge...

Hmmm?...on that one.

The extra chunk of points for the bungs will in all reasonable likely hood result in tons of stays in other rooms and types...and that could be annoying...

But not for DVC member services...every call will be the same:
"All I'm showing for those days is a 1bedroom in Saratoga...would like me to book it?"

So on second thought... Same as always

 

[WilsonFlyer]

I don't recall who made the supposition above that Disney Hotels are basically loss leaders but no statement could be further from the truth. The hotels on-property make money hand over fist. They just make more when they can get us to pay for it.

It's all about the spread on profits, baby!

 

[lockedoutlogic]

I don't recall who made the supposition above that Disney Hotels are basically loss leaders but no statement could be further from the truth. The hotels on-property make money hand over fist. They just make more when they can get us to pay for it.

It's all about the spread on profits, baby!

The Disney parks (wdw, Disneyland and soon to be all of Paris) makes somewhere around 3.5-4 billion in revenue off merchandise sales...with almost no overhead..
They make 3.5-4 billion off EVERYTHING ELSE... Including all the overhead.

Room revenue is not a "loss leader"...it is
A "break even" or marginally above.

But to know that... You should really talk to people who have seen the raw financial numbers... Maybe in a few places or across the whole resort.

Or maybe they've "turned the corner"...and make
A little.

It's all debate here...I suppose

 

[WMorganS]

I don't recall who made the supposition above that Disney Hotels are basically loss leaders but no statement could be further from the truth. The hotels on-property make money hand over fist. They just make more when they can get us to pay for it. It's all about the spread on profits, baby!

No, actually it's not. Disney's core values are (in order): safety, courtesy, show, and efficiency. I'm not making this up or swallowing the kook aide, this stuff is focussed on at all levels and is part of how they got ranked as the worlds most ethical company. It is about profit, of course, but profit within the context of safety, courtesy, and show. Sorry... it's a bit of a pet peeve ;-)

 

[lockedoutlogic]

No, actually it's not. Disney's core values are (in order): safety, courtesy, show, and efficiency. I'm not making this up or swallowing the kook aide, this stuff is focussed on at all levels and is part of how they got ranked as the worlds most ethical company.

It is about profit, of course, but profit within the context of safety, courtesy, and show.

Sorry... but of a pet peeve ;-)

Ohhhh...I think you might have "show" ranked too low.

Just a thought... Because Disney has been many things.. As most large public companies tend
To be

 

[rfc0001]

The real reality is that the poly points will be sold in 200 or 300 point chunks...and they will overload the demand for their studios and those around the lagoon due to the big block of "bungalow" points being factioned off

I was thinking about this - if you consider on average the Bungalows rent for about 6.5 x the points of that of a studio, and there are 320 studios, that means 29 % of the points for the resort are allocated for Bungalow stays. Will 29% of the buyers be staying in bungalows? I doubt it very much. In other words, its likely the studios will be oversold to PVB buyers, and the bungalows will be undersold.

Points are points, and as such will be sold regardless if buyer intent to stay in Bungalows, stay in Studios, or use them at other resorts, Disney Cruises, Disney Hotels, Adventures by Disney, etc. As such, completely agree 99% of Poly buyers will want to stay in Studios to maximize their points, despite only 75% of points being available in Studios, effectively overselling the studios. This is what happened at VGF, where Studios regularly sell out at 7-11 mos. That said, it's a closed system in which all DVC points get used -- no one let's their point simply expire. At worst they deposit them with RCI to extend their use for 2 years, in which case the points still get used -- by an exchanger. Or they get used for other DVC resorts, based on availability at time of booking, or get used to book Disney Hotels, Cruise, or Adventures by Disney, in which case Disney gets the points, and rents out excess inventory (including the Bungalows).